EN World EN5ider has launched! EN World EN5ider is the new way to get regular gaming articles and adventures online. For a small monthly donation, you will receive rules articles, gaming advice, adventures, and more. Collect EN World EN5ider articles and adventures designed and formatted to be filed in a binder.

So far there's a few judges who haven't weighed in, but I think by this point it's not too likely they will. As Option 6 just received more votes than 10 yesterday at 5pm-ish than we still have 48 hours before it can pass.

So far there's a few judges who haven't weighed in, but I think by this point it's not too likely they will. As Option 6 just received more votes than 10 yesterday at 5pm-ish than we still have 48 hours before it can pass.

I actually lean towards 10 since its less of a power increase compared to RAW, but I'm much more interested in resolution than deadlock. So I'll hold off and let the majority decide.

The downside is that it doesn't solve the problem as I see it. By the time you hit level 5, you've already chosen a few feats. Expertise isn't going to ruin diversity at that point. That being said, I wouldn't take Expertise at level 5. If given a choice, I wouldn't take it until it jumps to a +2 to hit, even though my "empirical evidence" shows that +1 to hit would be super good. I'd rather have a familiar, or Bravo, or the d8 curse feat.

Good to see there are others that's take a non-expertise feat.

I think that not forcing an expertise feat at 5th would let the player take thier expertise feat when they start feeling the 'math error'. While the expertise feat doesn't ruin diversity at 5th, allowing the slot to be free would encourage it as at least two of us would take more diverse feats and 'fix' the problem at a later date.

Originally Posted by TwoHeadsBarking

But the problem, in my view, isn't that characters don't get enough feats. It's the attacks not properly scaling with defenses issue. I think #10 solves it better than #6. I think #6 also solves the issue, don't get me wrong. I just like #10 more. As a judge. As a player, I'd prefer the restriction-less feat.

Well the thing with the scaling if that everyone starts at a different point and it becomes an issue at different levels for different people. Some players might feel the sting right off the bat while others don't well into paragon. I'd much rather take it when I feel it's right for my character instead of setting a single point and saying that's the 'best' time for everyone to take it.

Originally Posted by Velmont

If a 1 doesn't make a change, let's see my game, Merryl's Rescue.

Never said a +1 didn't change things. If you're seeing that a +1 WOULD make a difference more than a few times, you might be in the 'sweet spot' when it's time to pick up the feat. To trade examples, I can list off about 50 rolls where a +1 wouldn't have helped me in the least and about 2 that it would...

SO it's going to be option 10? Sigh... Could have really used the extra non-expertise feat right now but at least I will not have to change my sheet. Maybe I'll try that new Versatile Expertise feat.